Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Military Transportation Technology

Human Exoskeletons Getting Closer 198

Posted by kdawson
from the forever-war dept.
ColdWetDog writes "It's not Sigourney Weaver tossing aliens about, but The Register has an interesting blurb about a real human-capable exoskeleton that looks pretty cool (Lockheed-Martin press release). Runs for three hours at 3 mph on internal batteries; max speed is 7 mph. Of course, no price is listed but I suppose if you have to ask you can't afford it. Team this up with a Big Dog and you've got the ultimate high-tech cross-country team. Bring your own batteries. Or just wait for your jetpack to arrive."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Human Exoskeletons Getting Closer

Comments Filter:
  • by GrpA (691294) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @02:30AM (#27131359)

    Seems you have to stand spread-eagle and shout "Power Extreme" to start it up :(

    GrpA

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Offtopic? Someone never watched Centurions...

    • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

      by L4t3r4lu5 (1216702)
      This is the best first post I have ever seen.

      I don't care if I get modded offtopic; It needed to be said.
  • Speed (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @02:39AM (#27131381)

    Max speed is 10 not 7.

  • by Jane Q. Public (1010737) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @02:44AM (#27131395)
    Companies have been making exoskeletons ever since the "Hardiman" of the 1960s. While more modern versions have actually bordered on the practical (see the suit worn by Ripley in the movie Aliens... that is a real machine), they have always had to drag a power tether in order to do anything useful. Of course they did not show that part in the movie.

    The decision to do away with arms, for now, was probably a good one. One can still carry heavy loads, which is the main point.
    • by timmarhy (659436) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @02:47AM (#27131415)
      i have to agree. it's the knee's that give out first on an old solider. carrying 40kg's of gear isn't good for you at all, and i'm betting this kind of thing will be targeted at hilly terrian such as afganistan. i wonder how weird this would feel to walk with?
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Capt. Cooley (1438063)
      FTFA: it uses a four pound lithium battery, not a power cord. So yeah, they WOULDN'T show that part in the movie. Also mentioned: it's capable of carrying more than the standard load of a soldier, so it could carry back-up batteries. If I were a soldier, I'd want this.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by fractoid (1076465)
        FTFGPP: It was the suit from Aliens, and other historical ones, that had a hidden power cord in the movie. At least, that's how I read it.
        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by XeresRazor (142207)

          Except the suit from Aliens didn't actually work, it was just a big fiberglass structure suspended from a crane, with the body suspended the rest was light enough that it could be moved around just with muscle power.

          • Those particular suits might not have been real, but machines very much like them have been made for years. No, they were not very practical, because they always had to drag their power tethers around.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Yes, I was referring to the lifter that Ripley wore in the movie Aliens. The real "suits" of that type have power cords. I believe they also experimented with on-board generators, which of course tended to be loud and pumped out lots of exhaust.
    • by ratbag (65209)

      see the suit worn by Ripley in the movie Aliens... that is a real machine

      Citation required.

      • Real as in "In those days spirits were brave, the stakes were high, men were REAL men, women were REAL women, and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were REAL small furry creatures from Aplha Centauri.". The load lifter in Aliens, now that was a REAL machine.
    • by Nefarious Wheel (628136) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @08:06AM (#27132885) Journal

      Companies have been making exoskeletons ever since the "Hardiman" of the 1960...

      As with so many innovations, Heinlein came up with it almost first -- Kimball Kinneson greased Helmuth in one in Smith's Galactic Patrol, but Heinlein's powered suit was more accurate and interesting. Mobile Infantry, powered suits. Read "Starship Troopers". The book, not the fun-but-not-faithful movie.

      Although the shower scene was very cool...;)

      • by Cowmonaut (989226)

        Okay, no. Heinlein is a great author (at least in my opinion) but he did not come up with powered armor for soldiers first. That officially belongs to E.E. Smith's Lensman [wikipedia.org] series. That's right, over a decade before Starship Troopers.

        If you like space operas and haven't read Lensman get yourself a copy. You won't regret it.

        • As with so many innovations, Heinlein came up with it almost first -- Kimball Kinneson greased Helmuth in one in Smith's Galactic Patrol, but Heinlein's powered suit was more accurate and interesting.

          If you carefully re-read the post, you'll notice the qualifier "almost". I missed it too, so don't feel too bad. I was wondering, in light of your post, how someone who knew the name Kimball Kennison, and knew of the Galactic Patrol, would not have known that they predated Starship Troopers. So I re-read
          • I saw a new paperback copy of "Triplanetary" in my local store the other day. Looks like somebody decided to reprint the series.
          • Just to nail it down, I started reading E.E.Smith when I was about ten, about the same time I started reading Heinlein. I've worn out at least seven full sets of the paperbacks, and still live in hope that some day I will develop a "precisionist-grade mind".

            Thank you for noticing the qualifier.

      • by tcopeland (32225)

        > The book, not the fun-but-not-faithful movie.

        Starship Troopers is on the Navy reading list [militarypr...glists.com] in the junior enlisted section. Look around and you'll see Ender's Game there too...

        • by Gilmoure (18428)

          Starship Troopers was one of the reasons I joined the military. Really imprinted that civic duty thing. Books are dangerous. Especially on young minds. They should all be banned and replaced with video games.

      • by CAIMLAS (41445)

        Starship Troopers 1 was a cruel joke; ST3 was a farce of epic proportions. Surprisingly, they made Starship Troopers 3. Even more surprisingly, it's a half-decent movie, has Mobile Infantry (of a guise) and I found myself coming away entertained.

        And Starship Troopers is one of my favorite books, at that.

  • This definitely reminds me of the vest that you wear in Half Life: Opposing Force, or Gordon Freeman's HEV [wikipedia.org]. It can be run off of a power source, helps you lift things better, has optional attachments, cooling systems... huh. Does it come with a crowbar?
    • Yeah. It'll totally keep you alive during a Resonance Cascade too!

      No, this reminds me more of the leg braces worn by Chell in the Portal game, but only in that it will take the strain away from the user's legs in normal motion. I doubt it would respond well to jumping from great heights.
  • Honda Walking Assist (Score:5, Informative)

    by jeti (105266) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @02:52AM (#27131423) Homepage

    The Honda Walking Assist device has a rather unique and elegant design:
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2191712/honda_walking_assist/ [metacafe.com]

  • Why America sucks (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BadAnalogyGuy (945258) <BadAnalogyGuy@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @02:53AM (#27131435)

    I don't hate America, I love it. I wish only the best things for this country.

    But I hate articles like this, and I hate the truly American values it reveals.

    Why is it that when Americans think of powered exoskeletons, the first thing they think of is soldiers? It's really sad that militaristic thinking has pervaded almost every facet of our society.

    Compare that to Japan's take on exoskeletons [newscientist.com]. Over there, they think of how these things can be used in day-to-day activities to help people. It's a far cry from a fat-ass soldier lugging around a giant backpack and a gun.

    I can only hope that the wisdom of the American people that was so on display when Obama was elected will bring an end to our fascination and worship of our military.

    • by Nailor (999083) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @03:31AM (#27131563)

      I don't hate America, I love it. I wish only the best things for this country.

      But I hate articles like this, and I hate the truly American values it reveals.

      Why is it that when Americans think of powered exoskeletons, the first thing they think of is soldiers?

      War and military industry just tend to do that: invent things to help you win the battles easier. It's always been like that.

      War (even the one now in Iraq) is a quite good accelerator for military industry research and the industry creates a variety of products during a war. The bigger the war the bigger the influence on technology.

      Even though it's bad that the things are developed for the military, the research eventually helps normal people: when the war ends, the military companies start selling licenses for the products or continue researching to create a product for consumer markets.

      War so far has been a huge boost in techonology, if you think inventions like nuclear power, radar, V2 missiles, which later on lead to the Saturn V, medical breakthroughs (especially in first aid) etc.

      Impact of the war on technology is just something you just can't deny.

      • by Gilmoure (18428)

        Wasn't the Red Cross and organized trauma care developed in response to the Civil War (during the war, actually)? Same thing for precision manufacturing (canon/gun barrels), transportation enhancements, etc.

    • Re:Why America sucks (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Fallen Seraph (808728) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @03:47AM (#27131629)
      My question to you would be... why does the intent matter?

      Though a tremendous portion of the American annual budget goes toward the Military-Industrial Complex, a tremendous amount also goes toward initiatives such as DARPA, which helps fund more applied research than almost anyone, and in support countless universities and research centers. We have commercial air travel today because the US military helped jump start the commercial aviation sector before World War 2 (The Luftwaffe alone had more planes the all the Allies combined, and we knew we'd need private commercial help manufacturing aircraft in those quantities). The internet itself exists because the US military was seeking a way to maintain communications in the event that a major city was destroyed with an atomic bomb, causing a disruption in telephone communications. We have atomic energy because of the Manhattan Project, we have mass-produced Penicillin because of World War 2, along with radar, jet propulsion, and the birth of rocketry. Even going back to the Revolutionary War, the US government invested heavily in mechanized manufacturing and research into interchangeable parts for firearms.

      The fact is that the military is often willing to make investments into technologies that no one else is willing to even look at. Our investments in war have done terrible things. The destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, countless deaths in every war we've been in, etc. But many of these wars and conflicts would have taken place without the technology, and without the investments we've made into the military. The fact is that technology, in particular engineering, advances by leaps and bounds when war is at it's heels. Though we should never forget the cost at which it comes, it's important to realize that technology often has ripple effects and sometimes, like the internet, it becomes something wholly different than what was intended.
      • by Gorshkov (932507)

        The Luftwaffe alone had more planes the all the Allies combined, and we knew we'd need private commercial help manufacturing aircraft in those quantities

        Are you sure about that?

        German aircraft production, all types, 1941: 11,776
        Russian aircraft production, all types, 1941: 15,735
        (source: Russia's War, Richard Overly, page 155)

        If you *really* want, I'll see if I can find the figures for 1939 - I've got the figures in at least one of my books here, somewhere - but it might take hours to find it, and to

        • by Anspen (673098)

          German aircraft production, all types, 1939: 8,295
          USSR aircraft production, all types, 1939: 10,382
          UK aircraft production, all types, 1939: 7,940

          German aircraft production, all types, 1940: 10,247
          USSR aircraft production, all types, 1940: 10,565
          UK aircraft production, all types, 1940: 15,049
          (source: Richard Overly,Why the allies won (1996), page 331)

          Of course the USSR wasn't at war with Germany in 1939-1941 and an enormous part of the USSR planes where destroyed in the initial phase of the German in

      • Re:Why Parent Sucks (Score:5, Interesting)

        by antirelic (1030688) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @07:08AM (#27132567) Journal

        "a tremendous portion of the American annual budget goes toward the Military-Industrial Complex"

        Ah yes, I know, this is slashdot, and I'm going to get modded troll/flaimbait, but just for your edification, our Federal government was created with a very limited amount of powers in mind, most of which were focused DIRECTLY at military affairs. I'm not sure why people whine and complain that the government spends tons of cash on defense but not on XYZ, when its the job of the government to spend money on defense.

        For a list of enumerated powers (not the squishy interpreted ones), check out:

        http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec8 [usconstitution.net]

        I'm glad to see the government spend money on things it is SUPPOSE to... now if it would just cut out the shit that its not (like social security, Medicare, ponies, butterflies, and good will towards men).

        • I don't know why they don't just rename it the second bible and get it over with already. Ever think things may have changed in a few hundred years or that you got some things wrong? Its not some higher powers will, you are allowed to question it. You know it was written by fallible men.. Yet so many americans treat it as otherwise.
          • If the powers of the government are not those listed in the constitution, then what are the powers? Can they do literally anything they (the government currently in power) want to do?

            Yes, things have changed in a few hundred years. That's why the constitution can be amended. You know, someone proposes an amendment, we talk about it, people vote on it, etc. You can't just say 'things are different' and then ignore it because then there is no basis for discussion of what the government can or should do.

          • by ncc74656 (45571) *

            Ever think things may have changed in a few hundred years or that you got some things wrong? Its not some higher powers will, you are allowed to question it.

            That's why the Constitution provides for amendments. We've ratified 27 of them over the past 220+ years. You don't just start ignoring the parts you find inconvenient, as Democrats (with their blather of a "living Constitution") are wont to do; that way lies madness (or, more specifically, lawlessness). If it's not getting the job done, you propose

        • by drinkypoo (153816)

          I'm glad to see the government spend money on things it is SUPPOSE to... now if it would just cut out the shit that its not (like social security, Medicare, ponies, butterflies, and good will towards men).

          I think you mean, if it would just cut out the shit that its not, like harassing citizens, taking away our basic freedoms, incarcerating people for "crimes" which have no victim, legislating morality...

        • by pitchpipe (708843)
          Ah yes, I know, this is slashdot, and I'm going to get modded troll/flaimbait, but you ever notice how starting out your post with "Ah yes, I know, this is slashdot, and I'm going to get modded troll/flaimbait," never gets modded troll/flaimbait, except for this post?
        • by dave420 (699308)
          Wow. You'd want to live in a 1700s country for the rest of your life? Because that's what's going to happen if the government spends like a 1700s government. For fuck's sake - governments, just like everything else on the planet, need to change with the times. Human kind has learned a great deal since the US was first created, and yet you are willing to flush that down the toilet just so the founding fathers were infallible? Muppet.
      • The internet itself exists because the US military was seeking a way to maintain communications in the event that a major city was destroyed with an atomic bomb, causing a disruption in telephone communications.

        Why, oh why do people keep trotting out this tired old myth?

        The ARPANet wasn't created to survive a nuclear holocaust. Hey geniuses, it used common (though pricey and high speed) telco circuits - the same as carried telephone communications. They weren't hardened or anything like that. Explain to me

    • The power requirements mean it will have to dissipate huge amounts of heat, generate lots of noise which means it'll essentially be carrying a "shoot me!" sign and individuals without any form of body power assist can already kill tanks, bring down helicopter gunships etc.

      As a form of fork lift I can see some advantages in logistics, but not on the sharp end of a military.
       

      • by feyhunde (700477)
        The military has some odd uses for technology and what they need and fund has odd spin offs. And sometimes what they intend will shift.

        Some folks at the dull end love this because they see how much more a solider can carry. There's a practical limit of around 50 pounds of gear a solider can take on their person. What that gear is suppose to be and really is can vary. There's some great stories about differing philosophies to armor plate inserts, not only between the Brass and the guys in the field but bet

      • by Shrike82 (1471633)

        The power requirements mean it will have to dissipate huge amounts of heat, generate lots of noise which means it'll essentially be carrying a "shoot me!" sign

        And currently human soldiers generate no heat, and are completely silent. </sarcasm>

        I get your point, but I don't think this would make significant difference to the visibility of a soldier. Simply not using it on the front lines, where mobility and stealth might be needed would negate your point. If it's for carrying heavy loads then it's probably more likely to be used behind the front lines, for support and simply carrying stuff that might otherwise have required two men, or a vehicle.

      • After the first rocket, artillery round, mortar shell or bomb go off you won't have to worry about the enemy hearing you at all. Even training with earplugs in, your ears are ringing after a live-fire exercise and that's with the shells detonating at a "safe" distance, not right on top of you.

        As for heat - a human already shows up pretty well in infrared - especially at night since the ground is cool.

        Sure, an unassisted human can carry a variety of weapons that can damage armor or helicopters. However, do

        • by Gilmoure (18428)

          As a past aero-medevac tech (Fighting Unicorns [mablehome.com]!), anything to help with all the lugging stuff about would be a great help. Add in the fact that we were anywhere from 5-10 miles back from the front line, wouldn't be a lot of issues with another machine running.

    • Here is the trick, if you took the pure peace route and had such a suit made only for firefighters, police and other high hazard workers, you would only produce less than a 10th of the number of suits you would have made for the military and have had a suit that cost 10 time as much to make.

    • Dude, the sad truth is that ALL TECHNOLOGIES GO THROUGH THE ARMED FORCES FIRST, before coming mainstream to the population (that is of course useful inventions, not just any idea). They have the budget to make it commensurable, then once in production, the owners can take it to the public
      (usually 2 or 3 years down the road) and end up making it main stream. Like cell phone jammers, now even you and I can buy one, to jam those pesky cell phones from work to avoid employees using their cell phones.

    • by gtall (79522)

      This might have something to do with Japan relying on the Americans to keep those naughty Chinese from walking all over them. They have that luxury because the Americans pay for it.

      Gerry

    • The government is here primarily to protect me from hostile things bigger than myself. Build a better forklift for non-military use doesn't fit the bill. If I need something like this for personal or professional use, it is my job or the job of someone I pay to come up with it, not every taxpayer in the country. I, personally, can only hope that the decisions of the American people will not leave us vulnerable to those who hate us. However, I also hope that the diplomatic focus of this new administratio
    • Developing things like this is expensive. There is one source of money which is available for speculative projects with no immediate application. Government projects. The military(especially in the US) being one of the biggest spenders on this type of stuff, is a prime source. Therefore military applications should be the first thing considered.

    • by Dread_ed (260158)

      I didn't RTFA, and the first thing I thought about was using a powered exoskeleton for rehabilitation and healthy excercise for disabled persons while providing them with the necessary mobility to be functional and even productive in society.

      Use this article as an object lesson in meta-reading and learn what many conservatives have learned over the years: If you take the sentiments expressed by journalists as the sum total of American values you will miss the real landscape of American opinion. Also, gener

    • Why is it that when Americans think of powered exoskeletons, the first thing they think of is soldiers?

      He asked on the evolved version of a DARPA funded network.

    • by AP31R0N (723649)

      *groan*

      It's not America that sucks, it's willful ignorance that sucks.

      It's about where the money comes from. In Japan they have gigatons of old people and no young people to take care of them. So for them, that's an area where they need tech. If the Japanese had to rely on themselves for defense, they would have different priorities. As it is, they rely on US. We are their military. China knows that one boot on Japan would mean B-52s over Beijing. We in a very real way are the military of all of Weste

  • Energy density (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mcrbids (148650) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @02:54AM (#27131439) Journal

    Projects like this are always limited by a single factor: energy density.

    Loads of heavy batteries that only seem to last an hour or so, or loud, smelly, fault-prone ICEs are par for the course. See, millions of years of evolution have resulted in bodies that are surprisingly efficient in a wide variety of circumstances and pack loads of energy into a very little weight. When your body truly runs out of energy in sustained exhaustion, it can even burn its own motor (muscle tissue) for a last bit of energy!

    The problems are many and severe. It will be a while before exoskeletons are worth much.

    • by Yvanhoe (564877)
      Can you run 400 miles at 80 mph without a refill ? Or even 100 miles as electric cars do ? Our body is efficient but we did better.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by timmarhy (659436)
        no, but i can walk 25 miles in a day on a single plate of food without even having to go to extemes like burning muscle. pound for pound we convert food into energy far more efficently than any engine.
        • by feyhunde (700477) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @04:32AM (#27131815)
          So you're saying we should make our exoskeletons outta meat?

          Perhaps some sort of Meat creature we could ride into battle that could carry our armored bodies and heavy weapons?

        • by Yvanhoe (564877)
          At 80 mph ? While carrying another person ? (And I am being a bit unfair : the 80 mph is quite low)
          • by TheLink (130905)

            They're not using exoskeletons to replace vehicles. They want them for scenarios where you need foot soldiers, and there are many such scenarios.

            Right tool for the job and all that. Good luck going 80mph through a forest/jungle or even a dense concrete jungle.

            If I were a soldier, I'd rather be in places where the aircraft and tanks can't easily blow me away. And in those places it's typically hard to travel at 80mph.

            What would be useful is some sort of augmentation that would allow soldiers to operate in "s

            • by Yvanhoe (564877)
              I couldn't agree more with you. The original argument was about energy density of a human body, vs a battery pack.
              • by TheLink (130905)
                Thing is as long as the human body is not optional, the extra stuff has to be very much better.

                So an exoskeleton or vehicle has a higher bar for acceptance.

                For instance, even if the human body is more inefficient you're still going to have to supply food for for it.

                The other thing is the human body also self repairs given decent food and rest, and so if you factor in the logistics and supplies required to maintain vehicles in the field, the human body isn't that bad :).

                BTW just the other day I was looking a
  • Must resist (Score:5, Funny)

    by dexmachina (1341273) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @03:11AM (#27131487)
    From TFA:

    The user can hump 200lb with relative ease while marching in a HULC

    So...many...jokes...

  • Why so shortsighted? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Iamthecheese (1264298) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @05:05AM (#27131943)
    Am I the only person to see the uses? I want an air conditioner when I step outside. I want to not be limited to my own physical strength. I want to run without getting tired. I want to walk down to the hardware store... for 50 bricks and some fertilizer. I want to jump up onto my house's roof. I want a backup air supply just in case. And since I'm not limited by weight, why not a backup com system, a palmtop computer, a couple of extra batteries, a first aid kit, a change of clothing, and the other stuff people put in their cars and have to go back to their cars for. I want to lay aside concerns of endurance. I want to carry my six years old son about all day. I want to jack up my car by looking around for a sturdy piece of something, lifting that side of the car, and propping it up. I want to carry home six shopping bags without sweating. I want to carry heavy boxes sometimes. I want to wear a set of airbags that will tripple my chances of surviving most accidents. I want to punch through a wall, throw a big rock, run up to the top of a skyscraper. I want to hike to the top of Mount Fuju without stopping OR taking 6 months to get into shape. I want to take my dog out for a run at his speed. I want to climb mountains after learning how, not after an extensive weightlifting regime. I want to transplant a tree without heavy equipment. I want to fight a bear, catch a horse, hold down an aligator. I want to say a permanent goodbye to being physically inferior to any animal. I want to clean my house all day, play with my sons for hours, fix my roof, and mow the lawn without getting too tired. I want this suit!
    • by Shrike82 (1471633)
      So you want to be Chuck Norris?
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by gatkinso (15975)

      I suppose that you also want to view supernova explosions with something other than the ridiculous gelatinous orbs in your skull.

    • by geekoid (135745)

      "I want this suit!"

      No, what you want are magical flying ponies.

      • Do explain the "magical" part of anything in that list. Tell me one of thosse this suit can't enable. If it can support weight at the speed I can already move, I can punch through a wall or jump to the top of my one-story tall house with it. (jumping down is a different story)The air-bag system I mentioned isn't for sale because no one wants to carry it around. Given a powered suit both weight and heat become non-concerns. Did you mis-interpret "run to the top of a skyscraper?" I meant using the stairs. No
  • by jlebrech (810586) on Tuesday March 10, 2009 @05:32AM (#27132067) Homepage

    I'm perfectly happy with my endoskeleton as it is thank you!!

    Oh i can have both! didn't RTFA.

  • ...according to the place where I get my news [theonion.com].

  • ... wearing Techno-Trousers. :-)
  • "With our enhancements to the HULC system, Soldiers will be able to carry loads up to 200 pounds with minimal effort," said Rich Russell

    The logical conclusion would be to add 200lbs of armor plating to the soldier. Then they would upgrade it to 400lbs, and add more plating. Until they're finally wearing nuclear powered backpacks powering a suit that weighs close to 1000lbs and is able to resist nearly every type of hit while being able to wield ordinance that are typically mounted on top of jeeps and oth

  • Runs for three hours at 3 mph (5 Km/h) on internal batteries; max speed is 7 mph (11 Km/h).

  • After all, what could possibly go wrong?" [wikipedia.org]
  • What, no references to the Mechanically Automated NeuroTransmitter Interactive System?

    • by Mursk (928595)
      And Exosquad. What about Exosquad?
      • by HTH NE1 (675604)

        I didn't really notice the exoskeletons in Exosquad. I paid more attention to the plight of the Neo-Sapiens. I also wasn't much of a toy collector at the time.

  • I had to quote the title to make the response more obviously from the Epistles of Stooge:

    "Slo-o-o-owly they turned.
    Step by step.
    Inch by inch...."

"If a computer can't directly address all the RAM you can use, it's just a toy." -- anonymous comp.sys.amiga posting, non-sequitir

Working...